On 27/12/2006, at 3:44 AM, Gary Nunn wrote:

>
> A question that came up in a deep, late night conversation....
>
> Was religion a necessary tool for building moral and ethical  
> standards in
> early civilizations or social groups?  Or did someone simply invent  
> the fear
> of "Going To Hell" to impose their will on the masses?
>
> I suppose that also implies the question of if morality and ethical  
> behavior
> is a learned response or if they could be a genetic response.

Damon answered a part of it very well indeed - there is evidence that  
ethical behaviour predates religion (and far predates organised  
religion). The concept of altruism (whether "true" altruism or  
delayed payback which is well established through both game theory  
and observation of many species) far predates our own species and is  
common among social creatures.

As for genetic response, first it's important to understand that  
behaviour can be genetic just as eye colour is genetic or height has  
a large genetic component (and a nutritional component). There can be  
genes for very complex behaviours. Separating these from learned  
behaviours (generally known as culture if they're passed on through a  
group) can be hard, but something as complex as dam building in  
beavers is an innate genetic trait. I would not be surprised to find  
that aggression and kindness were genetic or had large genetic  
components.

So, to go back to your original question, was religion a necessary  
tool? I think it was probably an emergent effect of lots of other  
developments in language and culture, and quite possibly was selected  
for quite strongly if tribes with religion stayed together better and  
were more productive as a result of ritual. Some tribes even today  
have some fairly complex religious ritual associated with crop  
planting that have maximised their productivity.

No, I don't think religion was a necessary tool, we'd probably have  
managed ok without it. But it was a massive advantage to groups that  
had it, and as a meme it still works well (in that it spreads easily,  
mainly 'cause it's often a lot easier than other explanations and it  
provides a huge perceived benefit, and probably a real one in terms  
of survival and fitness among the disadvantaged).

It certainly *has* been used to impose the will of the authoritarian  
on the masses.

Charlie.


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to